[Insert witty title about relevant blog here]

Ask anyone about what they think a 'moving image' is and there most likely to be describing Hollywood style movies or popular television programmes. It's easy to see why, this style of moving image has been dominating the market for decades and because of which has left people believing that it is the only type of moving image. In the same way that your favourite songs aren't the only side of music this is not the whole story of moving images. Take the Sony Pictures Entertainment company, a household name in the moving image business, profited $7.2 billion in 2010 from making films that were described as 'chewing gum for the mind'. Yes they can be revolutionary and inventive but only in their use of technology because you've seen the stories before, they're  just tweaked and repackaged ready to be sold again and again... and again.
Looking to break the mould and create a piece of moving image that truly original and is emotion/thought provoking? Then have a gander at these 3 guidelines that you should be thinking about before you start;

• Try to make it an aesthetic experience- If your going to blow someone's mind at least make it nice to look at...
• The meaning of the piece should be cryptic- Make sure not even Sherlock Holmes could work it out.
• The piece should be visceral (emotionally provocative)- If the piece has no narrative what-so-ever then start pulling on their heart strings and start provoking emotions... that'll leave a lasting impression.

Still from "The Crossing"- Bill Viola

There are a number of video artists out there that are pushing the boundaries but one man stands out in front of them all, Bill Viola. Bill is regarded to be world's greatest video artist, his works can be divided into three types; conceptual, visual and an unique combination of the two. Human consciousness and experiences (Life,death,emotions) are central themes in Bill's work along with his fascination with mythical traditions (e.g Zen Buddhism). Expect no Hollywood blockbusters here, Bill's work throws the narrative out the window and instead invites you watch his videos and discover your own meaning to them through his manipulation of visceral impact. In class we watched snippets of "The Passing" which is 54mins of Birth, life and death. To some it was emotionally distressing during the scenes of his mother(Wynne Viola) and I myself found it uncomfortable. After we'd seen some clips there were some that were furious that Bill would video his mother dying, yes I can agree it's a tad peculiar but this show's Bill genius in doing such a thing. All the emotions evoked during class were exactly what Bill wanted from us, we wouldn't be human if we sat there emotionless. How many times have you sat in the cinema and seen people physically outraged by what their watching? Not very many I'd think. Break the contemporary mould and start evoking emotions... but don't feel guilty for watching some Sony chewing gum, everyone's mind needs a break.

During class we looked at another video artist, Christian Marclay. Marclay is probably most famous for his work with sound than his video work due to him, in the words of critic Thom Jurek,  being the 'unwitting inventor of turntablism' with his manipulation of records using a turntable. But we're here to talk about videos and one of Marclays greatest works is "The Clock", a 24hr compilation of scenes involving clocks. The Clock is described as 'addictive' and 'mesmerising'  but when watching it you must be asking yourself the question "Why am I watching time?" That's exactly what your doing but you cannot deny that The Clock is a masterpiece, a masterpiece that sells at $500,000 a copy (You'll not be renting it from Xtravision I'm afraid)

These artists show that you don't need gripping narrative to have a great film, you just need to be clever and have a fondness for tugging people heart strings...

A digital Pocahontas...

Increasingly these days I hear stories from people about young children being able to use Iphones, IPads, computers and all manner of gizmos without ever been shown how to use them. I know a 3year old who can flick through a Ipod touch to find his favourite songs (He can't even read) and then when he's bored doing that goes over to YouTube and starts watching videos. I was even told of a 5 year old who can recite the first 13 digits of Pi, whatever happened to action man??...
Surely this is all nonsense you say... Nope, it's not. In an ever expanding digital community everyone can be placed into one of two groups;

'Digital native'(Post 1985) or 'Digital immigrant' (Pre 1985)

Born post 1985? Then you are part of the digital native group. Natives have a naturally adaptive attitude to technology, allowing them to easily operate new technology and interfaces based on past experiences with previous technologies. Digital immigrants on the other hand have difficulty at first grasping the concepts of new technology but do adapt, just not as fast as a native would. I find that anyone born as far back as the 50's or 60's generally either have no interest in trying to adapt or have greatest difficulty adapting.
I myself experience these two cultural differences all the time, I can easily learn how to work just about any kind of technology quickly and often find myself solving problems for people on a device I've never used before.

In the last couple of years there as been a massive amount of people immersing themselves in social media (Facebook,Twitter etc.) and spending more time in the matrix (Internet) than they do in real life. It's becoming ridiculous where people feel that the whole world needs to see the entire life by photographing every drunken escapade and writing bullshit status updates. Did I also mention that people have forgotten how to speak English online? Fantastic grammar such as 'sumone' (Someone), 'reakon' (reckon), 'lyk' (Like), the list could go on for awhile...

Roping the blog back on track here's some interesting statistics about our ever-growing group of digital natives;

• There are 3 times more smartphones activated every minute than there is babies (Ever see a baby being activated? ...Me neither.)
• 30% of USA teens send 100 texts a day (Today I've sent 200... To one person)
• In 2010, 700 billion YouTube videos were viewed, that's a massive 1.9 million per day!
• 72% of under 25's comment on TV programmes via social networks
• 79% of students subjected to a media blackout reported adverse reactions ranging from distress, confusion & isolation

The last point in particular I can fully relate to, at any time of the day I can connect to the internet via my phone, tablet, laptop or computer. I never realised how attached I was to the internet until the power went of at home and I literally had no idea what to do with myself, until I got a smartphone with mobile internet... Problem = Solved. You cannot deny that the internet is easily the best thing since sliced bread but on the other hand the scale at which things are moving I fear that the line between reality and virtual will become so blurred that you'll not know if your a level 36 Warlord or not.... but on a serious note, we should be mindful of how the internet is inevitability going to starting affecting a social skills. We should try doing this ancient thing called talking face-to-face with real people (Deep breaths now) and experience social interaction in a real environment from time-to-time.  

Be careful of what you urinate into... It could be art...

In a traditional art world ideas can be outside of the box but you can't stray too far. Conceptual art on the other hand steps out of the box, laughs and proceeds to destroy the box...
Conceptual artists challenge the traditional artistic process, it's aim is showing that the art is not in the work but in the idea behind it. Marcel Duchamp paved the way for conceptual artists with his use of found objects or 'readymades'. Duchamps most famous readymade is 'Fountain' which was a urinal turned upside down and signed by Duchamp using the false name of 'R.Mutt'.  

'Fountain' (1917) - R.Mutt (Marcel Duchamp)

In the traditional world this urinal could not possibly be accepted as art, especially since the artist who signed it did not make it or even alter it.This is challenged by the notion that if you take an object outside of it's natural habitat and place it in an exhibition setting it then becomes 'art'. But where are the boundaries? Can myself as an artist take any object, place it an exhibitive setting and declare is as art?
My answer is yes you probably can but should you?As much as I'd love to go around taking objects and saying "I hereby declare this object as art!" I feel that if you were to produce art like this it would have to be provocative, disputing an ideal such as what 'Fountain' did or displaying the object in a way which is out of the ordinary. Besides that, how boring would it be doing that all your artistic career, very boring is the answer... very boring indeed.

"Score for a hole in the ground"- Jem Finer

A modern example of a conceptual artist is Jem Finer. One of Jem's site-specific pieces titled "Score for a hole in the ground" is a large 7 meter high gramophone horn coming out of the ground. The beauty of this idea is what's hiding under the ground, attached to the horn is large pipes that are struck by running water and droplets. The sound played from the hole is never the same. "Score for a hole in the ground" challenges peoples perception of what they believe to be music by showing that music isn't just made by conventional methods but that we can listen to the environment in ways we never realised. This piece has changed my pre-conceived notion of 'what is music?', it has challenged myself to think about interesting ways of making sounds using methods that anything but conventional.

These two examples in this blog show an importance in the choice of how and where an artist chooses to exhibit work. Would Duchamps 'Fountain' have had the same the effect on people if it was placed in the middle of a forest? Would Jems Gramophone challenge your perception of music if it was stuck in the middle of a gallery? No...

Darling, how delightfully PoMo...

The term 'modern' is used to describe modern thought or practice. This means that everything that is now historical was once considered 'modern' and anything created in the present day is also 'modern'.
In this case we are using the term 'modern' in reference to 'Modernism', the rejection of tradition. Modernism waved goodbye to the traditional forms or art,politics, literature, religion and even daily life as they were outdated in the newly emerging industrialised world.


Society began to believe only in progress, developments must be in technology and the economy otherwise there would be no point in existence. A 'grand narrative' such as the bible (or as I like to think of it as; Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth) was used to highlight the pitfalls of the past and why progression is needed. Marxism was an influence to this new way of thinking, the theory of Marxism is this; 

Thesis --> Anti Thesis --> Synthesis

According to this theory, when an idea is created it is then presented with 'anti-ideas' which leads to a review of the pro & cons of the idea which results in the creation of a better idea(synthesis). This sounds all well and good but there is the chance that the idea can be stuck in an endless loop between 'thesis' and 'anti-thesis', ideas end up being constantly bounced off each to no resolve. 
So if there's no ideas being created to further development society then is there no point in exsisting? Well have no fear, POMO IS HERE! (I apologise for the cheesiness, I couldn't resist...)  


Pomo (Post-modernism) is as the name suggests the movement which came after the 'Modern' era. Post-modernism in a way became almost like an anti-modernism, reacting or rejecting trends from modernism thus rejecting the whole point of modernism, progress. Post-modernism juxtaposed old and new styles, combining them as it seen fit in an "art for art's sake" approach. 
I was flicking in through YouTube looking for videos that would enlighten me for this post and I came across this; 

Moe's summary of Post-Modernism 

In layman's terms that's not a bad summary of Post-modernism. Post-modernism thrives on  parody and irony, doing 'weird for the sake of weird' and I like that because sometimes you have to smash all of what's traditional and get in touch with your random side.